ML101110172
| ML101110172 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach, Prairie Island  |
| Issue date: | 04/21/2010 |
| From: | Justin Poole Plant Licensing Branch III |
| To: | Jim Costedio, Hale S Florida Power & Light Energy Point Beach |
| Poole Justin/DORL/LPL3-1/ 301-415-2048 | |
| References | |
| Download: ML101110172 (2) | |
Text
From:
Poole, Justin Sent:
Wednesday, April 21, 2010 8:46 AM To:
Hale, Steve; COSTEDIO, JAMES
Subject:
DRAFT - Request for Additional Information on HELB RE: EPU Steve By letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) dated April 7, 2009 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. ML091250564), FPL Energy Point Beach, LLC, submitted a request to increase each units licensed core power level from 1540 megawatts thermal (MWt) to 1800 MWt reactor core power, and revise the technical specifications to support operation at this increased core thermal power level.
The NRC staff has reviewed the information provided, and determined that in order to complete its evaluation, additional information is required. We would like to discuss the questions, in draft form below, with you in a conference call.
This e-mail aims solely to prepare you and others for the proposed conference call. It does not convey a formal NRC staff position, and it does not formally request for additional information.
Justin C. Poole Project Manager NRR/DORL/LPL3-1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (301)415-2048 email: Justin.Poole@nrc.gov
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
DRAFT BACKGROUND In the licensee's Extended Power Uprate application dated April 7, 2009, the licensee stated it has reconstituted the Point Beach Nuclear Plant (PBNP) high energy line break licensing basis to ensure documentation demonstrates compliance with the plants licensing basis. The regulatory criteria that PBNP is subject to is contained in a December 1972 Atomic Energy Commission letter from A. Giambusso, Deputy Director for Reactor Projects, Directorate of Licensing, and an errata sheet for the attachment to the letter that was sent in January 1973.
Modifications to these criteria have been made over time. Licensees have had the option to implement the later criteria.
ISSUE The attachment to the December 1972 letter provided a general list of information for AEC review of the effects of a piping system break outside containment This list consisted of twenty-one (21) specific questions that were to be addressed by licensees. The questions are contained in Branch Technical Position 3-3, Protection Against Postulated Piping Failures In Fluid Systems Outside Containment, Revision 3, March 2007, Appendix B. It is not clear from the information submitted in PBNP License Amendment Request 261 how each of the 21 questions are addressed.
REQUEST For each of the 21 questions, provide the information requested.
DRAFT